The effects of lecturer’s model e-comments on graduate students’ peer e-comments and writing revision

References

• Abrams, I. Z. (2001). Computer-mediated communication and group journals: Expanding the repertoire of participant roles. System, 29(4), 489–503. doi: 10.1016/S0346-251X(01)00041-0
   Google Scholar
• Berg, E. C. (1999). The effects of trained peer response ESL students’ revision types and writing quality. Journal of Second Language Writing, 8(3), 215–241. doi: 10.1016/S1060-3743(99)80115-5
   Google Scholar
• Braine, G. (1997). Beyond word processing: Networked computers in ESL writing classes. Computers and Composition, 14(1), 45–58. doi: 10.1016/S8755-4615(97)90037-2
   Google Scholar
• Braine, G. (2001). A study of English as a foreign language (EFL) writers on a local-area network (LAN) and in traditional classes. Computers and Composition, 18(3), 275–292. doi: 10.1016/S8755-4615(01)00056-1
   Google Scholar
• Chandler, J. (2003). The efficacy of various kinds of error feedback for improvement in the accuracy and fluency of L2 student writing. Journal of Second Language Writing, 12(3), 267–296. doi: 10.1016/S1060-3743(03)00038-9
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Charles, C. M., & Mertler, A. C. (2004). Introduction to educational research (4th ed.). Beijing: Foreign Language Teaching and Researching Press.
   Google Scholar
• Chittum, J. R., & Bryant, L. H. (2014). Reviewing to learn: Graduate student participation in the professional peer-review process to improve academic writing skills. International Journal of Teaching and Learning in Higher Education, 26(3), 473–484.
   Google Scholar
• Crosthwaite, P. (2017). Retesting the limits of data-driven learning: Feedback and error correction. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 30(6), 447–473. doi: 10.1080/09588221.2017.1312462
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Diab, N. M. (2016). A comparison of peer, teacher and self-feedback on the reduction of language errors in student essays. System, 57, 55–65.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ertmer, P. A., Richardson, J. C., Belland, B., Camin, D., Connolly, P., Coulthard, G., … Mong, C. (2007). Using peer feedback to enhance the quality of student online postings: An exploratory study. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 12(2), 412–433. doi: 10.1111/j.1083-6101.2007.00331.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ferris, D. (2007). Preparing teachers to respond to student writing. Journal of Second Language Writing, 16(3), 165–193. doi: 10.1016/j.jslw.2007.07.003
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Frankfort-Nachmias, C., & Nachmias, D. (1996). Research methods in the social sciences (5th ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Huisman, B., Saab, N., Driel, J. V., & Broek, P. V. (2018). Peer feedback on academic writing: Undergraduate students’ peer feedback role, peer feedback perceptions and essay performance. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 43(6), 955–968. doi: 10.1080/02602938.2018.1424318
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hult, A. C. (2006). Researching and writing across the curriculum (3rd ed.). New York: Pearson Education Inc.
   Google Scholar
• Hyland, F. (2000). ESL writers and feedback: Giving more autonomy to students. Language Teaching Research, 4(1), 33–54. doi: 10.1177/136216880000400103
   Google Scholar
• Hyland, K. (2002). Teaching and researching writing. Essex: Longman.
   Google Scholar
• Hyland, K., & Hyland, F. (2006). Feedback on second language students' writing. Language Teaching, 39(2), 83–101. doi: 10.1017/S0261444806003399
   Google Scholar
• Jones, H. R., Garralda, A., Li, C. S., & Lock, G. (2006). Interactional dynamics in online and face-to-face peer-tutoring sessions for second language writers. Journal of Second Language Writing, 15(1), 1–23. doi: 10.1016/j.jslw.2005.12.001
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lee, I. (2014). Revisiting teacher feedback in EFL writing from sociocultural perspectives. TESOL Quarterly, 48(1), 201–213. doi: 10.1002/tesq.153
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Leedy, P. D., & Ormrod, J. E. (2005). Practical research: Planning and design (8th ed.). Pearson: Prentice Hall.
   Google Scholar
• Liou, H. C., & Peng, Z. Y. (2009). Training effects on computer-mediated peer review. System, 37(3), 514–525. doi: 10.1016/j.system.2009.01.005
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Liu, J., & Sadler,R, W. (2003). The effect and affect of peer review in electronic versustraditional modes on L2 writing. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 2(3), 193–227.
   Google Scholar
• Liu, J., & Sadler, R. J. (2000). The effects of peer versus teacher comments in both electronic and traditional modes on ESL writers’ revisions. In 34th annual TESOL Convention (Vol. 14, pp. 14–18).
   Google Scholar
• Liu, J., & Hansen, G. J. (2005). Peer response in second language writing classroom. Ann Arbor: The University of Michigan Press.
   Google Scholar
• Loewen, S., & Erlam, R. (2006). Corrective feedback in the chatroom: An experimental study. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 19(1), 1–14. doi: 10.1080/09588220600803311
   Google Scholar
• Matsumura, S., & Hann, G. (2004). Computer anxiety and students' preferred feedback methods in EFL writing. The Modern Language Journal, 88(3), 403–415. doi: 10.1111/j.0026-7902.2004.00237.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Min, H. T. (2005). Training students to become successful peer reviewers. System, 33(2), 293–308. doi: 10.1016/j.system.2004.11.003
   Google Scholar
• Min, H. T. (2006). The effects of trained peer review on EFL students’ revision types and writing quality. Journal of Second Language Writing, 15(2), 118–141. doi: 10.1016/j.jslw.2006.01.003
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Montgomery, J. L., & Baker, W. (2007). Teacher-written feedback: Student perceptions, teacher self-assessment, and actual teacher performance. Journal of Second Language Writing, 16(2), 82–99. doi: 10.1016/j.jslw.2007.04.002
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nelson, G. L., & Carson, J. G. (1998). Chinese students’ perceptions of ESL peer response group interaction. Journal of Second Language Writing, 5(1), 1–19. doi: 10.1016/S1060-3743(96)90012-0
   Google Scholar
• Nguyen, T. K. Thu. (2002). Error Feedback in L2 Writing Classes: How explicit does it need to be? Master of TESOL research. University of Social Sciences & Humanities, HCMC.
   Google Scholar
• Nguyen, T. K. T. (2002). Error feedback in L2 writing classes: How explicit does it need to be? Ho Chi Minh: Master of TESOL research, University of Social Sciences & Humanities.
   Google Scholar
• Nunan, D. (1992). Collaborative language learning and teaching. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Nunan, D. (2001). Research methods in language learning. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Padgate, W. (1999). Effects of different feedback types on grammatical improvement in journal writing of Thai EFL College students (Unpublished Ph.D. Dissertation). Indiana University of Pennsylvania, Pennsylvania.
   Google Scholar
• Paulus, T. M. (1999). The effect of peer and teacher feedback on student writing. Journal of Second Language Writing, 8(3), 265–289. doi: 10.1016/S1060-3743(99)80117-9
   Google Scholar
• Pham, V. P. H., & Nguyen, T. T. (2014). The effectiveness of peer feedback on graduate academic writing at Ho Chi Minh City Open University. Journal of Science Ho Chi Minh City Open University, 2(10), 35–48.
   Google Scholar
• Pham, V. P. H., & Usaha, S. (2016). Blog-based peer response for L2 writing revision. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 29(4), 724–748. doi: 10.1080/09588221.2015.1026355
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Razali, R., & Jupri, R. (2014). Exploring teacher written feedback and student revisions on ESL students’ writing. IOSR Journal of Humanities and Social Science, 19(5), 63–70. doi: 10.9790/0837-19556370
   Google Scholar
• Rodriguez, R. R. (2003). Computer-mediated peer response and its impact on revision in the College Spanish Classroom: A case study (Unpublished Ph.D. Dissertation). College of Arts & Sciences and College of Education University of South Florida, Floria.
   Google Scholar
• Saidon, M. A., Said, N. E., Soh, T. M., & Husnin, H. (2018). ESL Students’ perception of teacher’s written feedback practice in Malaysian classrooms. Creative Education, 09(14), 2300–2310. doi: 10.4236/ce.2018.914170
   Google Scholar
• Seliger, W. H., & Shohamy, E. (2001). Second language research methods. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Stanley, J. (1992). Coaching student writers to be effective peer evaluators. Journal of Second Language Writing, 1(3), 217–233. doi: 10.1016/1060-3743(92)90004-9
   Google Scholar
• Storch, N. (2005). Collaborative writing: Product, process and students’ reflections. Journal of Second Language Writing, 14(3), 153–173. doi: 10.1016/j.jslw.2005.05.002
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sullivan, N., & Pratt, E. (1996). A comparative study of two ESL writing environments: A computer-assisted classroom and a traditional oral classroom. System, 24(4), 491–501. doi: 10.1016/S0346-251X(96)00044-9
   Google Scholar
• Treglia, O. M. (2006). A study of teacher – Written commentary in relation to students revisions and perceptions in college writing classes. New York, NY: New York University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Truscott, J. (1996). The case against grammar correction in L2 writing classes. Language Learning, 46(2), 327–369. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-1770.1996.tb01238.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tsui, A. B., & Ng, M. (2000). Do secondary L2 writers benefit from peer comments? Journal of Second Language Writing, 9(2), 147–170. doi: 10.1016/S1060-3743(00)00022-9
   Google Scholar
• Tuzi, K. (2004). The impact of e-feedback on the revisions of L2 writers in an academic writing course. Computers and Composition, 21(2), 217–235. doi: 10.1016/j.compcom.2004.02.003
   Google Scholar
• Warschauer, M. (1996). Computer assisted language learning: An Introduction. In Fotos S. (ed.), Multimedia language teaching (pp. 3–20). Tokyo: Logos International. Retrieved from http://www.ict4lt.org/en/warschauer.htm
   Google Scholar
• Wu, W.-C. V., Petit, E., & Chen, C.-H. (2015). EFL writing revision with blind expert and peer review using a CMC open forum. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 28(1), 58–80. doi: 10.1080/09588221.2014.937442
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wu, W.-S. (2006). The effect of blog peer review and teacher feedback on the revisions of EFL writers. Journal of Education and Foreign Languages and Literature, 5(3), 125–139.
   Google Scholar
• Yang, M., Badger, R., & Yu, Z. (2006). A comparative study of peer and teacher feedback in a Chinese EFL writing class. Journal of Second Language Writing, 15(3), 179–200. doi: 10.1016/j.jslw.2006.09.004
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yang, Y. F. (2016). Transforming and constructing academic knowledge through online peer feedback in summary writing. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 29(4), 683–702. doi: 10.1080/09588221.2015.1016440
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yang, Y. F. (2018). New language knowledge construction through indirect feedback in web-based collaborative writing. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 31(4), 459–480. doi: 10.1080/09588221.2017.1414852
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yu, S., & Lee, I. (2016). Peer feedback in second language writing (2005–2014). Language Teaching, 49(04), 461–493. doi: 10.1017/S0261444816000161
   Google Scholar